Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Paul Greenberg ROLE REVERSAL: The Feds vs. Arizona

Paul Greenberg Role Reversal: The Feds vs. Arizona

The administration's lawsuit against the State of Arizona for attempting to stem the tide of illegal immigrants across its southern border isn't just an exercise in litigation. It's an exercise in irony.

For once upon a sad time, namely the bad old days in these Southern latitudes, states systematically denied a large class of their citizens the equal protection of the laws, denying their rights and, when challenged, waving the banner of States' Rights to cover the mistreatment of their own citizens.

The federal government was bound by law and conscience to step into that vacuum of law, and protect the privileges and immunities of all its citizens, to use the language of the Fourteenth Amendment. And it finally did so. The happy result is that the evils of racial segregation enforced by state law, and defended by various and distinguished advocates, is now a thing of the past.

Now the legal positions are reversed. It is the federal government that has long neglected its duty to secure the country's border, and so protect its citizens -- especially in states like Arizona. So state governments are trying to fill that vacuum. And it is the federal government, waving the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, that seeks to divert attention from its own failure to enforce the laws of the United States.

For connoisseurs of irony, a sage observer once noted, politics is a virtual banquet

Of course, the U.S. Department of Justice is suing the supposedly sovereign State of Arizona. It's so much easier to file suit than to secure the country's border.

The flood of intruders crossing that broken border represents a danger to the life, liberty and property of Arizona's citizens -- especially when the trade in illegal drugs runs through the Grand Canyon state. That geological wonder isn't the only prominent hole in Arizona; its porous border with Mexico is another.

Nor is Arizona the only state struggling with illegal immigration, which has become a national phenomenon. It's just more intense in places like Arizona, California and Texas. But because it's a national issue, does that mean illegal immigration can only be tackled by the national government -- and states need to butt out?

At this point, the thought might occur to a simple layman unlearned in the law that, just because something is a federal problem, like anything from illegal drugs to kidnapping, doesn't mean it's only a federal problem. States have passed a multitude of their own laws against various crimes. Why not illegal entry?

Does being in this country illegally mean you can't be in any of its states illegally? You'd probably have to be a licensed lawhead to defend a position like that -- it defies common sense -- but there's no shortage of lawyers in Washington.

Of all the many crimes that are both federal and state in this system of dual sovereignty, why has the administration chosen to make this one an exclusively federal preserve? Can it be because the other crimes don't have so great a body of voters who'd like to ignore it?

With this Supreme Court's command of the law, or lack thereof, the feds stand a good chance of prevailing when trial comes to appeal. Because of the intricacies of constitutional law, the border between state and federal jurisdiction when it comes to immigration law may be as vague as Arizona's own border. And the feds may manage to assert an exclusive jurisdiction over it -- when they're not asking state and local authorities for help.

At the moment the administration is bringing its full arsenal of doublespeak to bear against the state -- and people -- of Arizona. For example, the feds' brief asserts: "In our constitutional system, the federal government has pre-eminent authority to regulate immigration matters."

But can anyone seriously maintain that the federal government has exercised that authority along the no-man's land that is much of the country's southern border? Instead, it has let a vacuum of law and order develop there, and the results have been all too predictable. Is it any wonder Arizona has sought to fill that vacuum?

What the feds are really saying is that Washington has pre-eminent authority not to regulate immigration matters. Or can anyone with eyes to see believe immigration along the border is now well regulated?

It's interesting, and revealing, that not even the Department of Justice bases its case against Arizona's new law on the claim that it's just a legalized form of racial profiling. That's been the biggest complaint of those who can't have read the state law in question, or have chosen to ignore it.

The law actually bars profiling: "A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not consider race, color or national origin...."

No wonder the feds have chosen to make this a case of federal vs. state jurisdiction rather than one involving ethnic discrimination. Because there is no evidence that it does. Instead, Arizona's sin is that it is trying to enforce the law. Which is more than the federal government has been able to do.

PAT BUCHANAN on OBAMA'S HISPANDERING SELLOUT OF LEGALS - Heard English Today?

THE REASON OBAMA WANTED BILL RICHARDSON IN HIS ADMIN WAS THAT RICHARDSON IS A LA RAZA PARTY MEMBER. OBAMA HAS STACKED HIS ADMINSTRATION WITH LOADS OF THEM!


"New Mexico's Gov. Bill Richardson, himself Hispanic, gave the game away. At the Boston governors conference, he assured colleagues, nervous over the administration attacks on Arizona's immigration law, that "Obama is popular with Hispanic voters, and this is going to be a popular move with them nationally."


Pat Buchanan The War on Arizona

Not since President Eisenhower sent troops to Little Rock and JFK sent U.S. marshals to the University of Alabama has the federal government seemed so at war with a state of the union.

Arkansas and Alabama were defying U.S. court orders to desegregate. But Barack Obama's war on Arizona is not a war of necessity. It is a war of choice -- an unprovoked war, undertaken not to defend constitutional or civil rights, but to pander to his party's left and Hispanic voters.

New Mexico's Gov. Bill Richardson, himself Hispanic, gave the game away. At the Boston governors conference, he assured colleagues, nervous over the administration attacks on Arizona's immigration law, that "Obama is popular with Hispanic voters, and this is going to be a popular move with them nationally."

Eric Holder fended off criticism of his Justice Department suit against Arizona that alleges the state usurped federal responsibility by saying he has not ruled out a second suit for "racial profiling."

Rather than work with Arizona to secure the border and send the illegals home, the Obamaites are taking Mexico's side against Arizona, and against the faithful execution of U.S. law.

In a shocking and telling episode in the Rose Garden, Obama stood by mute as Felipe Calderon attacked the Arizona law as "discriminatory." The next day, Democrats in Congress, with Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano joining in, cheered the Mexican president's slander that Arizona introduced "racial profiling to law enforcement."

There was a time when such an insult to a state of our union, on U.S. soil by a foreign ruler, would have produced a diplomatic crisis, if not pistols at dawn.

Some of us recall Ike walking out of a Paris summit with Nikita Khrushchev rather than apologize for sending U-2s over Russia, and JFK, after the Bay of Pigs, retorting to Khrushchev that the United States did not need any lectures on intervention from people "whose character is forever stamped on the bloody streets of Budapest."

Democrats cheer as Arizona is attacked by a Mexican leader whose country treats illegal entry as a felony and illegal aliens with a brutality no American would tolerate.

And what exactly is at the heart of the Arizona law?

Simply this: Being in this country illegally is now a misdemeanor in Arizona, as it is in U.S. law. And as a 1940 U.S. law requires resident aliens to carry their green cards or work visas at all times, Arizona will require police to request such identification if, in a "lawful contact" -- a traffic violation or altercation -- the officer entertains a "reasonable suspicion" the individual may be here illegally.

Is this really Nazi Germany? Does this really justify the hysteria? And if this is the Gestapo, why did Holder not make this feature of the law the grounds for his Justice Department suit?

Answer: Calderon and Obama notwithstanding, racial profiling is prohibited by the Arizona law. Nor is there any evidence racial or ethnic profiling will be condoned by Arizona. The law has not even taken effect.

Unlike San Francisco and other towns that declare themselves to be "sanctuary cities" and refuse to cooperate with U.S. immigration authorities, Arizona is not challenging or usurping U.S. law, but trying to assist the U.S. government in enforcing the immigration laws.

Why is Arizona under attack for simply trying to help enforce our immigration laws? Because the Obama administration cannot, will not or does not even wish to see those laws enforced.

The U.S. government is today derelict in its constitutional duty.

And this is approaching an existential crisis for America. For there are in Arizona 450,000 illegal aliens, a population of law-breakers in a single state approaching the size of the entire U.S. Army.

Though we have 15 million Americans unemployed, near 10 percent of our workforce, with a higher share of African-Americans jobless, we have 8 million illegal aliens holding jobs. And last year the administration handed out over a million green cards and work visas to foreigners to come and take jobs that would have gone to American citizens.

In communist countries in the Cold War, all understood that the government did not represent the people. The state was at war with the nation.

That idea is taking root in America -- the idea that our government no longer seeks to represent us. And as one watches Obama and Congress take the side of a foreign leader attacking an American state, and the government refuse to do its duty and defend the borders or send the illegals back home, questions arise.

In this ongoing invasion of the United States that has brought 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens into our midst, whose side is the government on? Ours or theirs? What is the reason for the refusal to secure our border?

Why do Democrats insist that the illegal aliens be put on a "path to citizenship"?

Is the real objective the abolition of the old America we grew up in?

SUING AMERICAN - Obama Has Nothing Better to Do?

Suing America

Posted 07/12/2010 08:07 PM ET


Illegal Immigration: Democratic governors warn of an apocalyptic November if the administration pursues its war on Arizona. They fear defeat by people who want jobs, not "comprehensive immigration reform."

The main topics at the National Governors Association's summer meeting were supposed to be jobs and the economy. Instead, the buzz was about immigration and the political consequences of Washington's mindless suing of a sovereign state for daring to enforce federal immigration law.

"Universally the governors are saying, 'We've got to talk about jobs,'" Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen, a Democrat, said. "And all of a sudden we have immigration going on." He added, "It is such a toxic subject, such an important time for Democrats." It's no time, they feel, to be suing Arizona for protecting its border with Mexico and its citizens from drug cartels, things most Americans support.

"I might have chosen both a different tack and a different time," said Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter, another Democrat who saw the political writing on the wall and opted not to seek re-election. "This is an issue that divides us politically, and I'm hopeful their strategy doesn't do that in a way that makes it more difficult for candidates to get elected, particularly in the West."

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson defended the Justice Department's lawsuit and admitted its political motivation. "Policywise it makes sense," says the term-limited Democrat, "and Obama is popular with Hispanic voters, and this is going to ... move them nationally."

Actually, it makes no sense, politically or legally, not when the El Paso City Hall gets shot up and Arizona ranchers get killed in a flood of illegal aliens and drug cartels battling for turf. Americans want jobs and their borders secured. They don't want to get shot at in the unemployment line.

We've said the push for de facto amnesty is motivated in part by a desire for a vast new bloc of Democratic votes. The joke in some Washington circles is that the phrase "illegal aliens" has been replaced in the administration by "undocumented Democrats."

As it is, Eric Ostermeier over at Smart Politics says the orientation committee at the Republican Governors Association may be very busy soon. The University of Minnesota scholar finds that "Republicans are poised to win more gubernatorial seats in 2010 than they have in any election cycle over the past 90 years."

The mystery here is why the federal government isn't also suing the state of Rhode Island. Its immigration policy is identical to Arizona's and was not enacted through legislation like SB1070, but via an executive order by Gov. Donald Carcieri, a Republican.

In 2009, Col. Brendan Doherty, commander of the Rhode Island police, took it a step further and enrolled in the federal 287(g) program. This is the same program Arizona is enrolled in.

So when President Obama's Justice Department sues Arizona, he is really suing America and the American people. "I'd be willing to bet a lot of money that almost every state in America next January is going to see a bill similar to Arizona's," said Republican Gov. Dave Heineman of Nebraska.

And a lot more

WHY WE HAVE OPEN BORDERS & NO LEGAL NEED APPLY - It's All About Depressed Wages

July 13, 2010

ROBERT REICH

Former Secretary of Labor, Professor at Berkeley
Posted: July 13, 2010 12:16 PM



The Root of Economic Fragility and Political Anger
Missing from almost all discussion of America's dizzying rate of unemployment is the brute fact that hourly wages of people with jobs have been dropping, adjusted for inflation. Average weekly earnings rose a bit this spring only because the typical worker put in more hours, but June's decline in average hours pushed weekly paychecks down at an annualized rate of 4.5 percent.
In other words, Americans are keeping their jobs or finding new ones only by accepting lower wages.
Meanwhile, a much smaller group of Americans' earnings are back in the stratosphere: Wall Street traders and executives, hedge-fund and private-equity fund managers, and top corporate executives. As hiring has picked up on the Street, fat salaries are reappearing. Richard Stein, president of Global Sage, an executive search firm, tells the New York Times corporate clients have offered compensation packages of more than $1 million annually to a dozen candidates in just the last few weeks.
We're back to the same ominous trend as before the Great Recession: a larger and larger share of total income going to the very top while the vast middle class continues to lose ground.
And as long as this trend continues, we can't get out of the shadow of the Great Recession. When most of the gains from economic growth go to a small sliver of Americans at the top, the rest don't have enough purchasing power to buy what the economy is capable of producing.
America's median wage, adjusted for inflation, has barely budged for decades. Between 2000 and 2007 it actually dropped. Under these circumstances the only way the middle class could boost its purchasing power was to borrow, as it did with gusto. As housing prices rose, Americans turned their homes into ATMs. But such borrowing has its limits. When the debt bubble finally burst, vast numbers of people couldn't pay their bills, and banks couldn't collect.
Each of America's two biggest economic downturns over the last century has followed the same pattern. Consider: in 1928 the richest 1 percent of Americans received 23.9 percent of the nation's total income. After that, the share going to the richest 1 percent steadily declined. New Deal reforms, followed by World War II, the GI Bill and the Great Society expanded the circle of prosperity. By the late 1970s the top 1 percent raked in only 8 to 9 percent of America's total annual income. But after that, inequality began to widen again, and income reconcentrated at the top. By 2007 the richest 1 percent were back to where they were in 1928--with 23.5 percent of the total.
We all know what happened in the years immediately following these twin peaks--in 1929 and 2008.
Yes, China, Germany and Japan have contributed to America's demand-side problem by failing to buy as much from us as we buy from them. But to believe that our continuing economic crisis stems mainly from the trade imbalance--we buy too much and save too little, while they do the reverse--is to miss the biggest imbalance of all. The problem isn't that typical Americans have spent beyond their means. It's that their means haven't kept up with what the growing economy could and should have been able to provide them.
A second parallel links 1929 with 2008: when earnings accumulate at the top, people at the top invest their wealth in whatever assets seem most likely to attract other big investors. This causes the prices of certain assets--commodities, stocks, dot-coms or real estate--to become wildly inflated. Such speculative bubbles eventually burst, leaving behind mountains of near-worthless collateral.
The crash of 2008 didn't turn into another Great Depression because the government learned the importance of flooding the market with cash, thereby temporarily rescuing some stranded consumers and most big bankers. But the financial rescue didn't change the economy's underlying structure -- median wages dropping while those at the top are raking in the lion's share of income.
That's why America's middle class still doesn't have the purchasing power it needs to reboot the economy, and why the so-called recovery will be so tepid--maybe even leading to a double dip. It's also why America will be vulnerable to even larger speculative booms and deeper busts in the years to come.
The structural problem began in the late 1970s when a wave of new technologies (air cargo, container ships and terminals, satellite communications and, later, the Internet) radically reduced the costs of outsourcing jobs abroad. Other new technologies (automated machinery, computers and ever more sophisticated software applications) took over many other jobs (remember bank tellers? telephone operators? service station attendants?). By the '80s, any job requiring that the same steps be performed repeatedly was disappearing--going over there or into software. Meanwhile, as the pay of most workers flattened or dropped, the pay of well-connected graduates of prestigious colleges and MBA programs--the so-called "talent" who reached the pinnacles of power in executive suites and on Wall Street--soared.
The puzzle is why so little was done to counteract these forces. Government could have given employees more bargaining power to get higher wages, especially in industries sheltered from global competition and requiring personal service: big-box retail stores, restaurants and hotel chains, and child- and eldercare, for instance. Safety nets could have been enlarged to compensate for increasing anxieties about job loss: unemployment insurance covering part-time work, wage insurance if pay drops, transition assistance to move to new jobs in new locations, insurance for communities that lose a major employer so they can lure other employers. With the gains from economic growth the nation could have provided Medicare for all, better schools, early childhood education, more affordable public universities, more extensive public transportation. And if more money was needed, taxes could have been raised on the rich.
Big, profitable companies could have been barred from laying off a large number of workers all at once, and could have been required to pay severance--say, a year of wages--to anyone they let go. Corporations whose research was subsidized by taxpayers could have been required to create jobs in the United States. The minimum wage could have been linked to inflation. And America's trading partners could have been pushed to establish minimum wages pegged to half their countries' median wages--thereby ensuring that all citizens shared in gains from trade and creating a new global middle class that would buy more of our exports.
But starting in the late 1970s, and with increasing fervor over the next three decades, government did just the opposite. It deregulated and privatized. It increased the cost of public higher education and cut public transportation. It shredded safety nets. It halved the top income tax rate from the range of 70-90 percent that prevailed during the 1950s and '60s to 28-40 percent; it allowed many of the nation's rich to treat their income as capital gains subject to no more than 15 percent tax and escape inheritance taxes altogether. At the same time, America boosted sales and payroll taxes, both of which have taken a bigger chunk out of the pay of the middle class and the poor than of the well-off.
Companies were allowed to slash jobs and wages, cut benefits and shift risks to employees (from you-can-count-on-it pensions to do-it-yourself 401(k)s, from good health coverage to soaring premiums and deductibles). They busted unions and threatened employees who tried to organize. The biggest companies went global with no more loyalty or connection to the United States than a GPS device. Washington deregulated Wall Street while insuring it against major losses, turning finance--which until recently had been the servant of American industry--into its master, demanding short-term profits over long-term growth and raking in an ever larger portion of the nation's profits. And nothing was done to impede CEO salaries from skyrocketing to more than 300 times that of the typical worker (from thirty times during the Great Prosperity of the 1950s and '60s), while the pay of financial executives and traders rose into the stratosphere.
It's too facile to blame Ronald Reagan and his Republican ilk. Democrats have been almost as reluctant to attack inequality or even to recognize it as the central economic and social problem of our age. (As Bill Clinton's labor secretary, I should know.) The reason is simple. As money has risen to the top, so has political power. Politicians are more dependent than ever on big money for their campaigns. Modern Washington is far removed from the Gilded Age, when, it's been said, the lackeys of robber barons literally deposited sacks of cash on the desks of friendly legislators. Today's cash comes in the form of ever increasing campaign donations from corporate executives and Wall Street, their ever larger platoons of lobbyists and their hordes of PR flacks.
The Great Recession could have spawned another era of fundamental reform, just as the Great Depression did. But the financial rescue reduced immediate demands for broader reform.
Obama might still have succeeded had he framed the challenge accurately. Yet in reassuring the public that the economy will return to normal he has missed a key opportunity to expose the longer-term scourge of widening inequality and its dangers. Containing the immediate financial crisis and then claiming the economy is on the mend has left the public with a diffuse set of economic problems that seem unrelated and inexplicable, as if a town's fire chief deals with a conflagration by protecting the biggest office buildings but leaving smaller fires simmering all over town: housing foreclosures, job losses, lower earnings, less economic security, soaring pay on Wall Street and in executive suites.
Much the same has occurred with efforts to reform the financial system. The White House and Democratic leaders could have described the overarching goal as overhauling economic institutions that bestow outsize rewards on a relative few while imposing extraordinary costs and risks on almost everyone else. Instead, they have defined the goal narrowly: reducing risks to the financial system caused by particular practices on Wall Street. The solution has thereby shriveled to a set of technical fixes for how the Street should conduct its business.
What we get from widening inequality is not only a more fragile economy but also an angrier politics. When virtually all the gains from growth go to a small minority at the top -- and the broad middle class can no longer pretend it's richer than it is by using homes as collateral for deepening indebtedness -- the result is deep-seated anxiety and frustration. This is an open invitation to demagogues who misconnect the dots and direct the anger toward immigrants, the poor, foreign nations, big government, "socialists," "intellectual elites," or even big business and Wall Street. The major fault line in American politics is no longer between Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, but between the "establishment" and an increasingly mad-as-hell populace determined to "take back America" from it.
When they understand where this is heading, powerful interests that have so far resisted fundamental reform may come to see that the alternative is far worse.
This post originally appeared at RobertReich.org

6 OUT OF 10 AMERICANS (LEGALS) DO NOT HAVE FAITH IN OBAMA - BUT 38 MILLION ILLEGALS SAY THEY WILL STILL VOTE FOR HIM AGAIN!

6 out of 10 AMERICANS have little faith in the President. But that’s not entirely bad news for him. 38 MILLION ILLEGALS KNOW HE’S WORKING AS HARD FOR THEM, AS HE DID HIS BANKSTER DONORS!


Confidence in Obama reaches new low, Washington Post-ABC News poll finds
By Dan Balz and Jon Cohen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 13, 2010; A01
Public confidence in President Obama has hit a new low, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll. Four months before midterm elections that will define the second half of his term, nearly six in 10 voters say they lack faith in the president to make the right decisions for the country, and a clear majority once again disapproves of how he is dealing with the economy.
Regard for Obama is still higher than it is for members of Congress, but the gap has narrowed. About seven in 10 registered voters say they lack confidence in Democratic lawmakers and a similar proportion say so of Republican lawmakers.
Overall, more than a third of voters polled -- 36 percent -- say they have no confidence or only some confidence in the president, congressional Democrats and congressional Republicans. Among independents, this disillusionment is higher still. About two-thirds of all voters say they are dissatisfied with or angry about the way the federal government is working.
(See the raw data of the Washington Post-ABC poll)
Such broad negative sentiments have spurred a potent anti-incumbent mood. Just 26 percent of registered voters say they are inclined to support their representative in the House this fall; 62 percent are inclined to look for someone new.
Democrats nationally remain on the defensive as they seek to retain both houses of Congress this fall. Registered voters are closely divided on the question of whether they will back Republicans or Democrats in House races. Among those who say they are sure to cast ballots in November, 49 percent side with the GOP and 45 percent with Democrats.
Overall, a slim majority of all voters say they would prefer Republican control of Congress so that the legislative branch would act as a check on the president's policies. Those most likely to vote in the midterms prefer the GOP over continued Democratic rule by a sizable margin of 56 percent to 41 percent.
Economic worries continue to frame the congressional campaigns. Almost all Americans rate the economy negatively, although compared with the depths of the recession in early 2009, far fewer now describe economic conditions as "poor." Only about a quarter of all Americans think the economy is improving.
Recent economic developments -- a declining stock market, problems in the housing industry and an unemployment report showing only tepid job growth in the private sector -- may have bruised the president's ratings.
43 percent of all Americans now say they approve of the job Obama is doing on the economy, while 54 percent disapprove. Both are the worst, marginally, of his presidency. Even a third of Democrats give him negative marks here. And overall, intensity runs clearly against the president on the issue, with twice as many people rating him strongly negative as strongly positive.
At the same time, Democrats generally continue to hold the edge over Republicans when it comes to dealing with the nation's fragile economy. But that Democratic lead is slimmer than it was in 2006 before the party won back control of Congress. And among those most likely to vote this year, 39 percent trust the Democrats more and 40 percent the Republicans. About 17 percent of likely voters put their confidence in neither side.
Public opinion is split down the middle on the question of whether the government should spend more money to stimulate the economy in a way that leads to job creation. Among those who support such new spending, 18 percent change their minds when asked what they think if such outlays could sharply increase the budget deficit. In that scenario, 57 percent opposed another round of spending.
About six in 10 Democrats say they would be more likely to vote for a candidate who favors new government spending, while 55 percent of Republicans say they would be less likely to do so. Independent voters are divided on the question, with 41 percent more apt to oppose and 35 percent to support.
On at least one issue pending in Congress there is broader agreement: A sizable majority says the government should extend unemployment benefits.
Most Democrats and independents support increasing the time limit on government payments for jobless claims, and they are joined by 43 percent of Republicans. The notion clearly divides the GOP: Sixty percent of conservative Republicans oppose the idea, while 57 percent of moderate or liberal Republicans support it.
Low marks on deficit
On the question of Obama's leadership, 42 percent of registered voters now say they have confidence that he will make the right decisions for the country, with 58 saying they do not. At the start of his presidency, about six in 10 expressed confidence in his decision-making.
Obama's overall job-approval rating stands at 50 percent, equaling his low point in Post-ABC polling; 47 percent disapprove of the job he is doing. For the first time in his presidency, those who strongly disapprove now significantly outnumber those who strongly approve.
Among those who say they definitely will vote in November, 53 percent disapprove of the way he is handling his responsibilities.
The president's approval ratings reached a new low among whites, at 40 percent, with his positive marks dipping under 50 percent for the first time among white college-educated women.
On the issues tested in the poll, Obama's worst ratings come on his handling of the federal budget deficit, where 56 percent disapprove and 40 percent approve. He scores somewhat better on health-care reform (45 percent approve) and regulation of the financial industry (44 percent). His best marks come on his duties as commander in chief, with 55 percent approving.
Obama's overall standing puts him at about the same place President Bill Clinton was in the summer of 1994, a few months before Republicans captured the House and Senate in an electoral landslide.
President Ronald Reagan, who also contended with a serious recession at the outset of his first term, was a little lower at this point in 1982, with a 46 percent to 45 percent split on his approval ratings. Republicans went on to lose about two dozen seats in the House that fall.
Of course, Reagan and Clinton subsequently rebounded and went on to win reelection easily. Obama advisers find some hope from that history, even as the historical record foreshadows Democratic losses this November.
The latest poll was conducted by conventional and cellular telephone Wednesday through Sunday among a random national sample of 1,288 adults including interviews with 1,151 registered voters. The results for the full survey have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
*
OBAMA’S LONG HISTORY OF HISPANDERING….
Lou Dobbs Tonight
CNN -- July 27 Pilgrim: Well presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama voiced support for yesterday's court ruling that struck down Hazleton's illegal immigration law. Senator Obama called the federal court ruling a victory for all Americans. The senator said comprehensive reform is needed so local communities do not continue to take matters into their own hands. Senator Obama was a supporter of the Senate's failed immigration bill, which would have given amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney took a strong stand against chain migration today....
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Since Mexican President Felipe Calderon started his crackdown on drug cartels and corrupt law enforcement two years ago, more than 4,000 people have been killed. The death toll among law
enforcement has topped 500. Kidnappings and violence are spreading across the border, and now the AP reports Mexican cartels have green-lighted hits against targets in the U.S. We’ll talk to Phoenix police about becoming the kidnapping capital of the nation and the rapid increase in other crimes linked to Mexico the city is coping with.
*

Lou Dobbs Tonight
Monday, June 16, 2008
Tonight, we’ll have all the latest on the devastating floods in the Midwest and all the day’s news from the campaign trail. The massive corporate mouthpiece the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is holding a “North American Forum” to lay out its “shared vision” for the United States, Canada and Mexico – which is to say a borderless, pro-business super-state in which U.S. sovereignty will be dissolved. Undercover investigators have found incredibly lax security and enforcement at U.S. border crossings, according to a new report by the Government Accountability Office. This report comes on the heels of a separate report by U.C. San Diego that shows tougher border security efforts aren’t deterring illegal entries to the United States.
*
Lou Dobbs Tonight
And there are some 800,000 gang members in this country: That’s more than the combined number of troops in our Army and Marine Corps. These gangs have become one of the principle ways to import and distribute drugs in the United States. Congressman David Reichert joins Lou to tell us why those gangs are growing larger and stronger, and why he’s introduced legislation to eliminate the top three international drug gangs.
*
EVEN AS THE MEX DRUG CARTELS POUR OVER OUR BORDERS, OBAMA HAS TAKEN HUNDREDS MORE GUARD OFF SINCE SEPT 2009! AND THE OBAMA DECLARES “BORDER SECURITY” IS THE HALLMARK OF HIS PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIP!
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Monday, September 28, 2009

And T.J. BONNER, president of the National Border Patrol Council, will weigh in on the federal government’s decision to pull nearly 400 agents from the U.S.-Mexican border. As always, Lou will take your calls to discuss the issues that matter most-and to get your thoughts on where America is headed.


*
ACCORDING TO SENATOR LAMAR SMITH OF TEXAS, WHEN CHALLENGING SO- CALLED “HOMELAND SECURITY = PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIPS” LA RAZA JANET NAPOLITANO, AS TO WHY OUR BORDERS ARE WIDE OPEN TO NARCOMEX, OBAMA HAS CUT ENFORCEMENT BY MORE THAN 60% IN ALL AREAS.
Obama soft on illegals enforcement

Arrests of illegal immigrant workers have dropped precipitously under President Obama, according to figures released Wednesday. Criminal arrests, administrative arrests, indictments and convictions of illegal immigrants at work sites all fell by more than 50 percent from fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2009.

The figures show that Mr. Obama has made good on his pledge to shift enforcement away from going after illegal immigrant workers themselves - but at the expense of Americans' jobs, said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the Republican who compiled the numbers from the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE). Mr. Smith, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said a period of economic turmoil is the wrong time to be cutting enforcement and letting illegal immigrants take jobs that Americans otherwise would hold.
*
FAIRUS.org
FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM
FAIR CHARACTERIZES THE OBAMA, AND LA RAZA DEMS PLAN FOR AMNESTY AS FOLLOWS:
That's why, throughout 2009 FAIR has been tracking every move the administration and Congress has made to undermine our immigration laws, reward illegal aliens and burden taxpayers.
• Foot-dragging on proven methods of immigration law enforcement including border structures and E-Verify.
• Appointment of several illegal alien advocates to important administration posts.
• Watering down of the 287(g) program to limit local law in their own jurisdictions.
• Health care reform that mandates a “public option” for newly-arrived legal immigrants as well as illegal aliens.

Federal Cost For Amnesty - WHO PAYS? EMPLOYERS OF ILLEAGLS?

MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com
One of the ways the FEDS save money on the Mexican invasion, occupation, and welfare –prison state, is to dump the costs onto states. The FEDS mandate the Mexican occupation, then leave the bills, crime waves, anchors, and welfare costs to locals who have no say in this occupation.

CALIFORNIA IS IN MELTDOWN DUE TO THE MEXICAN INVASION, OCCUPATION, AND WELFARE STATE. MULTIPLY THAT BY 50 OTHER STATES.
IN CA, HERE’S WHAT IS GOING. YOU BETTER BELIEVE THAT CA’s LA RAZA DEMS, FEINSTEIN, BOXER, PELOSI, HONDA, LOFGREN, ESHOO, WAXMAN, HARMAN, BACA, BECERRA, FARR AND ILLEGALS LINDA AND LORETTA SANCHEZ ARE THIS VERY MOMENT WORKING ANOTHER ANGLE FOR CONTINUED OPEN BORDERS, NO WALL, NO I.C.E., NOT ENFORCEMENT OF LAWS PROHIBITING THE EMPLOYMENT OF ILLEGALS, AND QUICKIE AMNESTY!!! IT’S WHAT THEY’VE BEEN DOING SINCE THE LAST “AMNESTY” OF 1986!
*
ARE CALIFORNIANS OVERTAXED? WELL WHO DID YOU THINK HAS TO PAY FOR THE MEXICAN OCCUPATION FOR ALL THAT “CHEAP” LABOR? YOU STUPID GRINGO!

$20 BILLION A YEAR PAID BY CA IN SOCIAL SERVICES TO ILLEGALS!

$50 MILLION PER MONTH PAID TO ILLEGALS ON WELFARE IN LOS ANGELES!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
$30 BILLION GOES BACK TO NARCO DRUGS IN MEXICO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

47% OF THOSE EMPLOYED IN MEXICAN OCCUPIED LOS ANGELES ARE ILLEGALS!

THE TAX-FREE MEXICAN UNDERGROUND ECONOMY IN LOS ANGELES CALCULATED TO BE $2 BILLION PER YEAR!

2000 CALIFORNIANS MURDERED BY MEXICANS THAT FLED BACK OVER THE BORDER!

LARGEST PRISON SYSTEM IN THE COUNTRY, HALF OF ALL INMATES ARE ILLEGALS!

MEXICAN GANGS HAVE NOW SPREAD ALL OVER THE STATE!

GO TO THE LOS ANGLES TIMES AND DO A SEARCH FOR “MEXICO UNDER SIEGE” and “MEXICAN GANGS”. Then do a search in your own local paper. WAKE UP AND SMELL THE MEXICAN DUMPSTER!

*
Illegal Immigration and the Federal Budget
Illegal Immigration and the Federal Budget

Executive Summary

This study is one of the first to estimate the total impact of illegal immigration on the federal budget. Most previous studies have focused on the state and local level and have examined only costs or tax payments, but not both. Based on Census Bureau data, this study finds that, when all taxes paid (direct and indirect) and all costs are considered, illegal households created a net fiscal deficit at the federal level of more than $10 billion in 2002. We also estimate that, if there was an amnesty for illegal aliens, the net fiscal deficit would grow to nearly $29 billion.

Among the findings:

Households headed by illegal aliens imposed more than $26.3 billion in costs on the federal government in 2002 and paid only $16 billion in taxes, creating a net fiscal deficit of almost $10.4 billion, or $2,700 per illegal household.


Among the largest costs are Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).


With nearly two-thirds of illegal aliens lacking a high school degree, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments, not their legal status or heavy use of most social services.


On average, the costs that illegal households impose on federal coffers are less than half that of other households, but their tax payments are only one-fourth that of other households.


Many of the costs associated with illegals are due to their American-born children, who are awarded U.S. citizenship at birth. Thus, greater efforts at barring illegals from federal programs will not reduce costs because their citizen children can continue to access them.


If illegal aliens were given amnesty and began to pay taxes and use services like households headed by legal immigrants with the same education levels, the estimated annual net fiscal deficit would increase from $2,700 per household to nearly $7,700, for a total net cost of $29 billion.


Costs increase dramatically because unskilled immigrants with legal status -- what most illegal aliens would become -- can access government programs, but still tend to make very modest tax payments.


Although legalization would increase average tax payments by 77 percent, average costs would rise by 118 percent.


The fact that legal immigrants with few years of schooling are a large fiscal drain does not mean that legal immigrants overall are a net drain -- many legal immigrants are highly skilled.


The vast majority of illegals hold jobs. Thus the fiscal deficit they create for the federal government is not the result of an unwillingness to work.


The results of this study are consistent with a 1997 study by the National Research Council, which also found that immigrants' education level is a key determinant.

SPREAD THE WORD!
Email the entire Senate regarding the LA RAZA HISPANDERING OBAMA AMNESTY PUSH: http://houseofbills.com/email-the-senate/
*
MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com GO HERE AND CUT/PASTE ARTICLES TO EMAIL OR POST!
*
Lou Dobbs Tonight
And there are some 800,000 gang members in this country: That’s more than the combined number of troops in our Army and Marine Corps. These gangs have become one of the principle ways to import and distribute drugs in the United States. Congressman David Reichert joins Lou to tell us why those gangs are growing larger and stronger, and why he’s introduced legislation to eliminate the top three international drug gangs.
*
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Monday, September 28, 2009

And T.J. BONNER, president of the National Border Patrol Council, will weigh in on the federal government’s decision to pull nearly 400 agents from the U.S.-Mexican border. As always, Lou will take your calls to discuss the issues that matter most-and to get your thoughts on where America is headed.
*
NANCY PELOSI, LIKE DIANNE FEINSTEIN, HAS LONG ILLEGALLY HIRED ILLEGALS AT HER NAPA WINERY AND RESTAURANTS. PELOSI IS ALSO HEAVILY INVESTED IN SUNKIST, WHICH DOES NOT PAY LIVING WAGES FOR ORANGE PICKERS.
EMAIL: NANCY PELOSI
http://speaker.house.gov/contact/
CALL NANCY PELOSI Washington , DC - (202) 225-4965 San Francisco , CA - (415) 556-4862 EMAIL NANCY PELOSI sf.nancy@mail.house.gov

*
WSWS.org
NO ADS FREE NEWS ON CORPORATE RAPE
criminal illegals and the benefits to society
http://www.usillegalaliens.com/impacts_of_illegal_immigration_property_crimes_and_operation_predator.html
*
LA RAZA – “THE (MEXICAN) RACE”….
THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF LA RAZA
1126 16th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
202-785 1670
Get on La Raza’s email list to find out what this fascist party is doing to expand the Mexican occupation. NCLR.org
FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE MEXICAN WELFARE STATE, AND MEXICAN SUPREMACY
LA RAZA is the virulently racist political party for ILLEGALS (only Mexicans) and the corporations that benefit from illegals, and the employers of illegals. IT IS ILLEGAL TO HIRE AN ILLEGAL.
LA RAZA IS THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of AMERICA and has contempt for AMERICANS, AMERICAN LAWS, AMERICAN LANGUAGE, AMERICAN BORDERS, and the AMERICAN FLAG.
However LA RAZA does like the AMERICAN WELFARE SYSTEM. The welfare system in the country is so good that Mexico has dumped 38 million of their poor, illiterate , criminal and frequently pregnant over our border.
*
FAIRUS.org
FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM
FAIR CHARACTERIZES THE OBAMA, AND LA RAZA DEMS PLAN FOR AMNESTY AS FOLLOWS:
That's why, throughout 2009 FAIR has been tracking every move the administration and Congress has made to undermine our immigration laws, reward illegal aliens and burden taxpayers.
• Foot-dragging on proven methods of immigration law enforcement including border structures and E-Verify.
• Appointment of several illegal alien advocates to important administration posts.
• Watering down of the 287(g) program to limit local law in their own jurisdictions.
• Health care reform that mandates a “public option” for newly-arrived legal immigrants as well as illegal aliens.

*
LosAngelesTimes
Do a search for Mexican gangs, or go to “Mexico Under Siege”
“THE DRUG WAR AT OUR BORDERS” …ask yourself why the LA RAZA DEMS want these borders OPEN!
*
usillegalaliens.com
*
USCFILE.org
Cut and paste articles and post email all over the country!
*
REPORT ILLEGALS TO: 1-866-DHS-2-ICE.
http://www.ice.gov/ ICE, ice, ICE

*

JUDICIALWATCH.org
*
Report Illegals & Employers Toll Free... (866) 347-2423
INS National Customer Service Center Phone: 1-800-375-5283.
http://www.reportillegals.com/
*
You can contact President Obama and let him know of your opposition to amnesty for illegal aliens:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/

BARACK OBAMA 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, NW Washington, DC 20500 comments@whitehouse.gov Comments: 202-456-1111 Switchboard for live listener: 202 456 1414 Fax: 202-456-2461
*
Obama soft on illegals enforcement

Arrests of illegal immigrant workers have dropped precipitously under President Obama, according to figures released Wednesday. Criminal arrests, administrative arrests, indictments and convictions of illegal immigrants at work sites all fell by more than 50 percent from fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2009.

The figures show that Mr. Obama has made good on his pledge to shift enforcement away from going after illegal immigrant workers themselves - but at the expense of Americans' jobs, said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the Republican who compiled the numbers from the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE). Mr. Smith, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said a period of economic turmoil is the wrong time to be cutting enforcement and letting illegal immigrants take jobs that Americans otherwise would hold.
*
Here is the Department of Homeland Security's Hotline for reporting suspected illegal employees and employers: 866-347-2423 (YOU MAY BE WASTING YOUR TIME HERE. HISPANDERING OBAMA SELECTED LA RAZA JANET NAPOLITANO TO HEAD “HOMELAND SECURITY = PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIP” FOR OPEN AND UNDEFENDED BORDERS)
*
Immigration Enforcement Group Defends Against Amnesty Push

The ALIPAC Team
www.alipac.us
*
Here is the Department of Homeland Security's Hotline for reporting suspected illegal employees and employers: 866-347-2423

THE MEXICAN DRUG CARTEL - Are They Voting For Obama?

KEEP THIS IN MIND AS YOU WITNESS OBAMA AND HIS LA RAZA HISPANDERING ADMINISTRATION’S ENDLESS ASSAULT ON THE PEOPLE OF ARIZONA FOR MORE “CHEAP” LABOR ILLEGALS, KNOWN TO HIM AS “UNREGISTERED VOTERS”.




Gov. Brewer: Most border-crossers are drug 'mules' for Mexican cartels
Expanding on comments made at a candidates' debate, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer said today she believes that most illegal immigrants crossing the border are "mules" carrying drugs for Mexican cartels.
"I believe today, under the circumstances that we're facing, that the majority of the illegal trespassers that are coming into the state of Arizona are under the direction and control of organized drug cartels and they are bringing drugs in," Brewer told the Associated Press.
"There's strong information to us that they come as illegal people wanting to come to work. Then they are accosted and they become subjects of the drug cartel," she said.
During the June 15 Republican debate she said she believed that most illegal immigrants did not enter the United States for work. She then associated illegal immigrants with drug smuggling, drop houses, extortion and other criminal activity, according to AP.
The state law she signed making it a crime to be in Arizona illegally will take effect next month.
*

206 Most wanted criminals in Los Angeles. Out of 206 criminals--183 are hispanic---171 of those are wanted for Murder.

Why do Americans still protect the illegals??

http://www.dailybreeze.com/ci_11255121?appSession=934140935651450&RecordID=&PageID=2&PrevPageID=&cpipage=1&CPISortType=&CPIorderBy=

*
TEN MOST WANTED CRIMINALS IN CALIFORNIA ARE MEXICANS!
http://ag.ca.gov/wanted/mostwanted.php?fid=mostWantedFugitives_2010-01

http://www.mexica-movement.org/ They claim all of North America for Mexico!

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53103 Did you know illegals kill 12 Americans a day?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/1738432/posts FBI Crime Statistics - Crimes committed by illegals.

*

A GLIMPSE OF WHAT THE LA RAZA INVASION AND OCCUPATION HAS COST US:
WHAT COSTS MORE PER YEAR THAN THE IRAQ WAR?

Illegal Aliens Cause Massive Cuts For US Seniors (THESE ARE DATED FIGURES. CALIFORNIA ALONE PUTS OUT NEARLY $20 BILLION. LOS ANGELES COUNTY ALONE PAYS OUT $600 MILLION IN WELFARE FOR ILLEGALS, WHILE IT’S SCHOOLS ARE IN MELTDOWN AND MEXICAN GANGS FLOURISH!)
1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year in California alone!
Welfare for illegals in “sanctuary city” Los Angeles County is $600 million per year (source: JudicalWatch.org).
*
2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens.
*
3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens.
*
4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English!
*
5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies. 1 in 5 births in Los Angeles are by Mexicans that crossed our borders for “free” birthing and then 18 years of welfare. 1 in 10 the rest of the country!
*
6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens. In California alone ONE BILLION IS SPENT BY STATE PRISONS to maintain illegals, many of whom are still operating their gang and drug operations. In sanctuary city Los Angeles, approximately $300 million per year is spent on jails to incarcerate illegals
*
7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens.
*
8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare and Social Services by the American taxpayers.
*
9. $300-$400 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.
*
10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two-and-a-half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US. In sanctuary County of Los Angeles, there are 500 – 1,000 murders by Mexican illegals. They cost the county nearly one million dollars each to prosecute. Over 90% of all warrants for homicide is for a Mexican illegal! Of Los Angeles’ TOP 200 MOST WANTED CRIMINALS, 176 ARE MEXICANS! There have been 2,000 Californians murdered by illegals that fled back to Mexico to avoid prosecution. The rate for re-arrests of illegals is staggering.
*
11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana, crossed into the U. S from the Southern border.
*
12. The National Policy Institute, estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.
*
13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin. Banks such as La Raza donors Wells Fargo and Bank of America, both illegal open bank accounts for illegals, and handed millions in mortgages to illegals with stolen I.D.
*
14. 'The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United States Total cost is a whoopin'... $338.3


*
VISIT THIS SITE FOR INFO ON OUR NATION’S IDENTITY AS WE BECOME ANNEXED BY MEXICO
THE BRADLEY REPORT ON AMERICAN’S NATIONAL IDENTITY
BRADLEYPORJECT.org
*


"Remember 187 -- the Proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to
non-citizens -- was the last gasp of white America in California."
---Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party
Anchor Baby Power
La Voz de Aztlan has produced a video in honor of the millions of babies that have been born as US citizens to Mexican undocumented parents. These babies are destined to transform America. The nativist CNN reporter Lou Dobbs estimates that there are over 200,000 "Anchor Babies" born every year whereas George Putnam, a radio reporter, says the figure is closer to 300,000. La Voz de Aztlan believes that the number is approximately 500,000 "Anchor Babies" born every year.
The video below depicts the many faces of the "Anchor Baby Generation". The video includes a fascinating segment showing a group of elementary school children in Santa Ana, California confronting the Minutemen vigilantes. The video ends with a now famous statement by Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez of the University of Texas at Austin.

http://www.aztlan.net/anchor_baby_power.htm

*
Some Interesting Quotes from Hispanic "Leaders" :

"Go back to Boston!
Go back to Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims!
Get out!
We are the future.
You are old and tired.
Go on.
We have beaten you.
Leave like beaten rats.
You old white people.
It is your duty to die . .
Through love of having children, we are going to take over."
---Augustin Cebada, Brown Berets


"They're afraid we're going to take over the governmental institutions
and other institutions.
They're right.
We will take them over . .
We are here to stay."
---Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council.


"The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction
of Mexico without firing a single shot."
---Excelsior, the national newspaper of Mexico


"We have an aging white America.
They are not making babies.
They are dying.
The explosion is in our population and
I love it.
They are shitting in their pants with fear.
I love it."
---Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez, University of Texas



LA RAZA AGENDA: 3 Examples
Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council "They're afraid we're going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They're right. We will take them over. . We are here to stay."

Mario Obledo, California Coalition of Hispanic Organizations and California State Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under Jerry Brown, also awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by Bill Clinton "California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn't like it should leave."

Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General We are practicing "La Reconquista" in California."
*
NOTE THAT PELOSI HAS LONG ILLEGALLY HIRED ILLEGALS AT HER NAPA WINERY. FEINSTEIN HAS LONG HIRED ILLEGALS AT HER S.F. HOTEL. BOTH ARE DILIGENT IN SABOTAGING E-VERIFY AND WORK HARD FOR AMNESTY.
BARBARA BOXER HAS LONG HARANGUED I.C.E. FOR ATTEMPTING TO ENFORCE OUR LAWS AND DO THEIR JOBS! SHE HAS FOUGHT ENGLISH ONLY LAWS KNOWING MEXICANS HATE THE GRINGO LANGUAGE.
BOTH FEINSTEIN AND BOXER HAVE FOUGHT VOTING I.D. REQUIREMENTS SO ILLEGALS DON’T HAVE TO PULL OUT ONE OF THEIR POCKETFULS OF FRAUDULENT I.D.s to VOTE.
nancy pelosi's email address

http://www.speaker.gov/contact/comment_email

obama email address white house

http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact

senator feinstein's email address

http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactUs.Emailme

senator boxer's email

http://boxer.senate.gov/en/contact/policycomments.cfm
*


MOST OF THE FORTUNE 500 ARE GENEROUS DONORS TO LA RAZA – THE MEXICAN FASCIST POLITICAL PARTY. THESE FIGURES ARE DATE. CNN CALCULATES THAT WAGES ARE DEPRESSED $300 - $400 BILLION PER YEAR!

“The principal beneficiaries of our current immigration policy are affluent Americans who hire immigrants at substandard wages for low-end work. Harvard economist George Borjas estimates that American workers lose $190 billion annually in depressed wages caused by the constant flooding of the labor market at the low-wage end.” Christian Science Monitor
*
OBAMA’S LONG HISTORY OF HISPANDERING….
Lou Dobbs Tonight
CNN -- July 27 Pilgrim: Well presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama voiced support for yesterday's court ruling that struck down Hazleton's illegal immigration law. Senator Obama called the federal court ruling a victory for all Americans. The senator said comprehensive reform is needed so local communities do not continue to take matters into their own hands. Senator Obama was a supporter of the Senate's failed immigration bill, which would have given amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney took a strong stand against chain migration today....
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Since Mexican President Felipe Calderon started his crackdown on drug cartels and corrupt law enforcement two years ago, more than 4,000 people have been killed. The death toll among law
enforcement has topped 500. Kidnappings and violence are spreading across the border, and now the AP reports Mexican cartels have green-lighted hits against targets in the U.S. We’ll talk to Phoenix police about becoming the kidnapping capital of the nation and the rapid increase in other crimes linked to Mexico the city is coping with.
*

Lou Dobbs Tonight
Monday, June 16, 2008
Tonight, we’ll have all the latest on the devastating floods in the Midwest and all the day’s news from the campaign trail. The massive corporate mouthpiece the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is holding a “North American Forum” to lay out its “shared vision” for the United States, Canada and Mexico – which is to say a borderless, pro-business super-state in which U.S. sovereignty will be dissolved. Undercover investigators have found incredibly lax security and enforcement at U.S. border crossings, according to a new report by the Government Accountability Office. This report comes on the heels of a separate report by U.C. San Diego that shows tougher border security efforts aren’t deterring illegal entries to the United States.
*
Lou Dobbs Tonight
And there are some 800,000 gang members in this country: That’s more than the combined number of troops in our Army and Marine Corps. These gangs have become one of the principle ways to import and distribute drugs in the United States. Congressman David Reichert joins Lou to tell us why those gangs are growing larger and stronger, and why he’s introduced legislation to eliminate the top three international drug gangs.
*
EVEN AS THE MEX DRUG CARTELS POUR OVER OUR BORDERS, OBAMA HAS TAKEN HUNDREDS MORE GUARD OFF SINCE SEPT 2009! AND THE OBAMA DECLARES “BORDER SECURITY” IS THE HALLMARK OF HIS PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIP!
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Monday, September 28, 2009

And T.J. BONNER, president of the National Border Patrol Council, will weigh in on the federal government’s decision to pull nearly 400 agents from the U.S.-Mexican border. As always, Lou will take your calls to discuss the issues that matter most-and to get your thoughts on where America is headed.


*
ACCORDING TO SENATOR LAMAR SMITH OF TEXAS, WHEN CHALLENGING SO- CALLED “HOMELAND SECURITY = PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIPS” LA RAZA JANET NAPOLITANO, AS TO WHY OUR BORDERS ARE WIDE OPEN TO NARCOMEX, OBAMA HAS CUT ENFORCEMENT BY MORE THAN 60% IN ALL AREAS.
Obama soft on illegals enforcement

Arrests of illegal immigrant workers have dropped precipitously under President Obama, according to figures released Wednesday. Criminal arrests, administrative arrests, indictments and convictions of illegal immigrants at work sites all fell by more than 50 percent from fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2009.

The figures show that Mr. Obama has made good on his pledge to shift enforcement away from going after illegal immigrant workers themselves - but at the expense of Americans' jobs, said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the Republican who compiled the numbers from the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE). Mr. Smith, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said a period of economic turmoil is the wrong time to be cutting enforcement and letting illegal immigrants take jobs that Americans otherwise would hold.
*
FAIRUS.org
FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM
FAIR CHARACTERIZES THE OBAMA, AND LA RAZA DEMS PLAN FOR AMNESTY AS FOLLOWS:
That's why, throughout 2009 FAIR has been tracking every move the administration and Congress has made to undermine our immigration laws, reward illegal aliens and burden taxpayers.
• Foot-dragging on proven methods of immigration law enforcement including border structures and E-Verify.
• Appointment of several illegal alien advocates to important administration posts.
• Watering down of the 287(g) program to limit local law in their own jurisdictions.
• Health care reform that mandates a “public option” for newly-arrived legal immigrants as well as illegal aliens.

OBAMA'S AGENDA: BANKSTERS DONORS INTERESTS & MUCHO CHEAP LABOR (ONLY)

"More than 14 million Americans are out of work, and nearly half of them have been jobless for six months or longer. The unemployment rate for black Americans is 15.4 percent."

"What a country. We’ll do whatever it takes to make sure the bankers keep living the high life and swilling that Champagne while at the same time we’re taking books out of the hands of schoolchildren trying to get an education."

"What’s needed is the same sense of urgency about helping struggling families and putting people back to work as the Bush and Obama crowds showed when the banks were about to go bust. That sense of urgency is always missing when it’s ordinary people who are in trouble."

*

THE ENTIRE REASON THE BORDERS ARE LEFT OPEN IS TO CUT WAGES!

“We could cut unemployment in half simply by reclaiming the jobs taken by illegal workers,” said Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, co-chairman of the Reclaim American Jobs Caucus. “President Obama is on the wrong side of the American people on immigration. The president should support policies that help citizens and legal immigrants find the jobs they need and deserve rather than fail to enforce immigration laws.”

*

July 12, 2010
Outside the CasinoBy BOB HERBERT
The hustlers and high rollers at Wall Street’s gaming tables are starting to feel lucky again.

Hiring is beginning to pick up in the very sector that led the country to the edge of a depression. An article on the front page of The Times on Sunday noted that this turnaround “underscores the remarkable recovery of the biggest banks and brokerage firms since Washington rescued them in the fall of 2008, and follows the huge rebound in profits for members of the New York Stock Exchange, which totaled $61.4 billion in 2009, the most ever.”

The hustlers and high rollers are always there to skim the cream, no matter what’s happening in the real world of ordinary American families.

In a column that was published a few days before Christmas 2007, the very month that the great recession began, I wrote about the record-breaking seasonal bonuses being handed out on Wall Street: an obscene $38 billion, the highest total ever. The subprime mortgage debacle was already upon us and the economy was sinking like a stone, but the casino crowd was celebrating as never before. “Even as the Wall Streeters are high-fiving and ordering up record shipments of Champagne and caviar,” I noted, “the American dream is on life support.”

The fattest of the fat cats live in a perpetual heads-I-win, tails-you-lose environment. But if you step outside the Wall Street casino, you’ll notice that things aren’t going too well in the rest of the country. More than 14 million Americans are out of work, and nearly half of them have been jobless for six months or longer. The unemployment rate for black Americans is 15.4 percent.

School districts across the country are taking drastic steps to cope with collapsing budgets: firing personnel, increasing class sizes, cutting kindergarten and summer-school programs and, in some cases, moving to a four-day school week. The Associated Press, in a demoralizing report, recently noted: “As the school budget crisis deepens, administrators across the nation have started to view school libraries as luxuries that can be axed rather than places where kids learn to love reading and do research.”

What a country. We’ll do whatever it takes to make sure the bankers keep living the high life and swilling that Champagne while at the same time we’re taking books out of the hands of schoolchildren trying to get an education.

I’m no friend of the deficit hawks, but the staggering amounts of money we’ve been spending for the past several years have not benefited the people most in need of help and have not laid the foundation for a more secure economy going forward. We’ve handed over unconscionable tax breaks to the very rich (you can see the Prada paraders high-stepping along Fifth Avenue in their million-dollar flip-flops) and countless billions to the private contractors brazenly feeding off the agony of the endless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

(Sunday’s paper also had an article about six more American G.I.’s killed in Afghanistan.)

What’s needed is the same sense of urgency about helping struggling families and putting people back to work as the Bush and Obama crowds showed when the banks were about to go bust. That sense of urgency is always missing when it’s ordinary people who are in trouble.

Millions of Americans are stuck in an economic depression. Several million have either lost their homes to foreclosure during the recession or are in imminent danger of losing them. The long-term unemployed are facing painful daily choices on such basic matters as whether to buy food or refill needed prescription medication or pay electric bills to keep the lights on.

Back in February, The Times’s Peter Goodman wrote about the new poor, “people long accustomed to the comforts of middle-class life who are now relying on public assistance for the first time in their lives — potentially for years to come.”

There can be no real national recovery with so many millions of people in such deep economic distress. We can pretend that we’re locked in some kind of crisis of confidence, that if only people felt better about themselves and the economy then they’d start spending again. This is a variation on the “mental recession” lunacy spouted by Phil Gramm, John McCain’s top economic adviser during the presidential campaign.

People who are out of work and deeply in debt don’t have any money to spend. The only way to get real money back into their wallets and bank accounts (and thus back into the economy) is to get them back to work.

With our help, the banks and Wall Street have done fine. Better than they had any right to expect. It’s the ordinary folks outside the casino, in the real world, who are still in desperate need of help. But in a society of, by and for the rich, that help will be a long time coming.


LA RAZA HARRY REID’S STATE IS NOW 25% ILLEGAL!

The president’s attention is a favor to Senator Harry M. Reid, the Democratic majority leader, who faces a tough re-election battle in Nevada and promised to pursue immigration legislation in an appeal to his state’s growing Hispanic population.


July 1, 2010
Obama Urges Fix to ‘Broken’ Immigration System

By PETER BAKER
WASHINGTON — President Obama pressed Congress on Thursday to pass comprehensive immigration legislation to fix a “fundamentally broken” system by toughening enforcement of existing laws while creating a path to citizenship for many of the 11 million people in the United States illegally.
In his first speech devoted entirely to the hotly disputed issue since taking office, Mr. Obama tried to navigate between what he called the two extremes of the immigration debate, defending his efforts to strengthen border security while rejecting the idea of mass deportations as “logistically impossible and wildly expensive.” But he said change could not wait, despite the political risks.
“In sum, the system is broken and everybody knows it,” he told an audience of lawmakers, activists, business executives and labor leaders at the American University in Washington. “Unfortunately, reform has been held hostage to political posturing, special-interest wrangling and to the pervasive sentiment in Washington that tackling such a thorny and emotional issue is inherently bad politics.”
Embracing legislation drafted by Senators Charles E. Schumer, a New York Democrat, and Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, Mr. Obama said the solution was to take a “practical, common-sense approach” and put the onus on Republicans to step up and join him. He noted that some of the Senate Republicans who voted for immigration legislation when President George W. Bush was in office have backed off, and he attributed their shift to the politics of the moment.
“I’m ready to move forward, the majority of Democrats are ready to move forward and I believe the majority of Americans are waiting to move forward,” he said. “But the fact is, without the bipartisan support that we had just a few years ago, we cannot solve this problem.”
Several Republican lawmakers fired back, arguing that the real problem is an administration that does not do enough to enforce laws already on the books. Moreover, they said, with 10 percent unemployment, this is the wrong time to be loosening the laws on illegal workers.
“We could cut unemployment in half simply by reclaiming the jobs taken by illegal workers,” said Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, co-chairman of the Reclaim American Jobs Caucus. “President Obama is on the wrong side of the American people on immigration. The president should support policies that help citizens and legal immigrants find the jobs they need and deserve rather than fail to enforce immigration laws.”
The president’s speech, along with high-profile meetings earlier in the week with advocates for immigrants and members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, was more about politics than legislation at least in the near term. Neither the White House nor the Democratic leadership in Congress has any expectation of trying to actually push through a law this year, given the major issues already on their plate, like financial regulation and energy.
But Mr. Obama’s public focus on the issue appeared aimed at framing the debate for the approaching midterm elections, when the Hispanic vote could be critical in several important states. The president’s attention is a favor to Senator Harry M. Reid, the Democratic majority leader, who faces a tough re-election battle in Nevada and promised to pursue immigration legislation in an appeal to his state’s growing Hispanic population. Mr. Obama invited Mr. Reid to meet with him at the White House after the speech.
Mr. Obama also used the opportunity to repeat his opposition to Arizona’s new law requiring law enforcement officers to question the immigration status of anyone they stop for other reasons if they suspect that they are in the country illegally, calling it “ill conceived” and “divisive.” But he did not announce the lawsuit that the Justice Department is preparing to challenge it.
“We face the prospect that different rules for immigration will apply in different parts of the country, a patchwork of different immigration rules where we all know one clear national standard is needed,” he said. “Our task then is to make our national laws actually work, to shape a system that reflects our values as a nation of laws and as a nation of immigrants.”
Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona, the Republican minority whip, said the state’s law was a response to Washington’s failure to deal with the problem: “All Americans would be better served if this administration focused on implementing proven border security solutions rather than engaging in demagoguery and criticizing states that have been left to enforce immigration law because of the federal government’s unwillingness to do so.”
Mr. Schumer and Mr. Graham have proposed a plan to require Social Security cards with biometric data — like fingerprints or retinal patterns — to ensure that illegal workers cannot get jobs. They say the plan would also strengthen border security and interior enforcement, create a process for admitting temporary workers and establish a “tough but fair path to legalization” for those already here.
Under their plan, illegal immigrants would be required to admit that they broke the law and to pay fines and back taxes, pass background checks and prove that they can speak English before going to the back of the line of prospective immigrants seeking permanent legal residency and citizenship.
Republican critics said that still amounted to amnesty for millions of people who broke the law and would only encourage continued illegal migration.
“Part of the reason why we have been so successful in this country is because we live by the rule of law,” Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the second-ranking House Republican, said before the president’s speech. “We do live by its enforcement and transparency in our judiciary. And I think some of the ire right now surrounding the immigration issue is having to do with the illegal immigration and, frankly, the flouting of the law.”